Search for: "KELLER v. USA" Results 1 - 20 of 26
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Oct 2013, 1:07 am
The latest issue of the Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht (Vol. 73, no. 3, 2013) is out. [read post]
8 Jun 2015, 3:45 am by Ron Coleman
 This seemed to have been confirmed by the decision, not long afterwards, in Penguin Group (USA) Inc. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 4:32 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Penguin Books USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997), or the “alternative means” test found in International Olympic Committee v. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 4:23 am by Steve McConnell
Yeah, we never get tired of reading that Posner quote.Similar facts were at issue in Keller v. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 8:09 am
 As discussed here, if considered satire, not parody, Dumb Starbucks could be liable for infringement (Dr Seuss Enterprises v Penguin Books USA (1997)).It seems unlikely that adding DUMB- provides enough distinction for it to avoid being considered an unauthorised derivative of Starbucks’ copyrighted works. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 8:51 pm by cdw
The Court also decided Wood v. [read post]
3 Nov 2017, 10:51 am by Amanda Pickens
Keller Unlimited LLC, et al.; No. 2:17-cv-02758 (D.S.C. [read post]
18 Aug 2011, 5:00 am by Bexis
Appx. 185 (9th Cir. 2009); Keller v. [read post]
29 May 2012, 6:44 am by Joshua Matz
Amnesty International USA. [read post]
17 Sep 2020, 12:34 pm by Aaron Mackey
EFF, together with Daphne Keller at the Stanford Cyber Law Center, as well as lawyers from Davis Wright Tremaine and Walters Law Group, represent the plaintiffs. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 7:50 pm
Cadbury Adams USA LLC (Chicago IP Litigation Blog) State Tort claim preempted by patent claim where pleading of bad faith did not meet Iqbal standards: Viskase Companies, Inc. v. [read post]
19 May 2017, 12:23 pm by Wolfgang Demino
, 644 S.W.2d 705, 706 (Tex. 1982); Houston Omni USA Co. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2017, 4:06 pm by INFORRM
USA A Maryland blogger has been forced to pay a “substantial sum” to Melania Trump as part of a settlement for a defamation claim over an article containing unsubstantiated allegations that she once worked as an escort. [read post]